Glenn Greenwald Ukraine

Glenn Greenwald: The Censorship Campaign Against Western Criticism of NATO’s Ukraine Policy Is Extreme

Preventing populations from asking who benefits from a protracted proxy war, and who pays the price, is paramount. A closed propaganda system achieves that.
[Alisdare Hickson / CC BY-SA 2.0]

By Glenn Greenwald

If one wishes to be exposed to news, information or perspective that contravenes the prevailing US/NATO view on the war in Ukraine, a rigorous search is required. And there is no guarantee that search will succeed. That is because the state/corporate censorship regime that has been imposed in the West with regard to this war is stunningly aggressive, rapid and comprehensive.

On a virtually daily basis, any off-key news agency, independent platform or individual citizen is liable to be banished from the internet. In early March, barely a week after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the twenty-seven nation European Union — citing “disinformation” and “public order and security” — officially banned the Russian state-news outlets RT and Sputnik from being heard anywhere in Europe. In what Reuters called “an unprecedented move,” all television and online platforms were barred by force of law from airing content from those two outlets. Even prior to that censorship order from the state, Facebook and Google were already banning those outlets, and Twitter immediately announced they would as well, in compliance with the new EU law.

But what was “unprecedented” just six weeks ago has now become commonplace, even normalized. Any platform devoted to offering inconvenient-to-NATO news or alternative perspectives is guaranteed a very short lifespan. Less than two weeks after the EU’s decree, Google announced that it was voluntarily banning all Russian-affiliated media worldwide, meaning Americans and all other non-Europeans were now blocked from viewing those channels on YouTube if they wished to. As so often happens with Big Tech censorship, much of the pressure on Google to more aggressively censor content about the war in Ukraine came from its own workforce: “Workers across Google had been urging YouTube to take additional punitive measures against Russian channels.”

So prolific and fast-moving is this censorship regime that it is virtually impossible to count how many platforms, agencies and individuals have been banished for the crime of expressing views deemed “pro-Russian.” On Tuesday, Twitter, with no explanation as usual, suddenly banned one of the most informative, reliable and careful dissident accounts, named “Russians With Attitude.” Created in late 2020 by two English-speaking Russians, the account exploded in popularity since the start of the war, from roughly 20,000 followers before the invasion to more than 125,000 followers at the time Twitter banned it. An accompanying podcast with the same name also exploded in popularity and, at least as of now, can still be heard on Patreon.

What makes this outburst of Western censorship so notable — and what is at least partially driving it — is that there is a clear, demonstrable hunger in the West for news and information that is banished by Western news sources, ones which loyally and unquestioningly mimic claims from the U.S. government, NATO, and Ukrainian officials. As The Washington Post acknowledged when reporting Big Tech’s “unprecedented” banning of RT, Sputnik and other Russian sources of news: “In the first four days of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, viewership of more than a dozen Russian state-backed propaganda channels on YouTube spiked to unusually high levels.”

Note that this censorship regime is completely one-sided and, as usual, entirely aligned with U.S. foreign policy. Western news outlets and social media platforms have been flooded with pro-Ukrainian propaganda and outright lies from the start of the war. A New York Times article from early March put it very delicately in its headline: “Fact and Mythmaking Blend in Ukraine’s Information War.” Axios was similarly understated in recognizing this fact: “Ukraine misinformation is spreading — and not just from Russia.” Members of the U.S. Congress have gleefully spread fabrications that went viral to millions of people, with no action from censorship-happy Silicon Valley corporations. That is not a surprise: all participants in war use disinformation and propaganda to manipulate public opinion in their favor, and that certainly includes all direct and proxy-war belligerents in the war in Ukraine.

Yet there is little to no censorship — either by Western states or by Silicon Valley monopolies — of pro-Ukrainian disinformation, propaganda and lies. The censorship goes only in one direction: to silence any voices deemed “pro-Russian,” regardless of whether they spread disinformation. The “Russians With Attitude” Twitter account became popular in part because they sometimes criticized Russia, in part because they were more careful with facts and viral claims that most U.S. corporate media outlets, and in part because there is such a paucity of outlets that are willing to offer any information that undercuts what the U.S. Government and NATO want you to believe about the war.

Their crime, like the crime of so many other banished accounts, was not disinformation but skepticism about the US/NATO propaganda campaign. Put another way, it is not “disinformation” but rather viewpoint-error that is targeted for silencing. One can spread as many lies and as much disinformation as one wants provided that it is designed to advance the NATO agenda in Ukraine (just as one is free to spread disinformation provided that its purpose is to strengthen the Democratic Party, which wields its majoritarian power in Washington to demand greater censorship and commands the support of most of Silicon Valley). But what one cannot do is question the NATO/Ukrainian propaganda framework without running a very substantial risk of banishment.

It is unsurprising that Silicon Valley monopolies exercise their censorship power in full alignment with the foreign policy interests of the U.S. Government. Many of the key tech monopolies — such as Google and Amazon — routinely seek and obtain highly lucrative contracts with the U.S. security state, including both the CIA and NSA. Their top executives enjoy very close relationships with top Democratic Party officials. And Congressional Democrats have repeatedly hauled tech executives before their various Committees to explicitly threaten them with legal and regulatory reprisals if they do not censor more in accordance with the policy goals and political interests of that party.

But one question lingers: why is there so much urgency about silencing the small pockets of dissenting voices about the war in Ukraine? This war has united the establishment wings of both parties and virtually the entire corporate media with a lockstep consensus not seen since the days and weeks after the 9/11 attack. One can count on both hands the number of prominent political and media figures who have been willing to dissent even minimally from that bipartisan Washington consensus — dissent that instantly provokes vilification in the form of attacks on one’s patriotism and loyalties. Why is there such fear of allowing these isolated and demonized voices to be heard at all?

The answer seems clear. The benefits from this war for multiple key Washington power centers cannot be overstated. The billions of dollars in aid and weapons being sent by the U.S. to Ukraine are flying so fast and with such seeming randomness that it is difficult to track. “Biden approves $350 million in military aid for Ukraine,” Reuters said on February 26; “Biden announces $800 million in military aid for Ukraine,” announced The New York Times on March 16; on March 30, NBC’s headline read: “Ukraine to receive additional $500 million in aid from U.S., Biden announces”; on Tuesday, Reuters announced: “U.S. to announce $750 million more in weapons for Ukraine, officials say.” By design, these gigantic numbers have long ago lost any meaning and provoke barely a peep of questioning let alone objection.

It is not a mystery who is benefiting from this orgy of military spending. On Tuesday, Reuters reported that “the Pentagon will host leaders from the top eight U.S. weapons manufacturers on Wednesday to discuss the industry’s capacity to meet Ukraine’s weapons needs if the war with Russia lasts years.” Among those participating in this meeting about the need to increase weapons manufacturing to feed the proxy war in Ukraine is Raytheon, which is fortunate to have retired General Lloyd Austin as Defense Secretary, a position to which he ascended from the Raytheon Board of Directors. It is virtually impossible to imagine an event more favorable to the weapons manufacturer industry than this war in Ukraine:

Demand for weapons has shot up after Russia’s invasion on Feb. 24 spurred U.S. and allied weapons transfers to Ukraine. Resupplying as well as planning for a longer war is expected to be discussed at the meeting, the sources told Reuters on condition of anonymity. . .

Resupplying as well as planning for a longer war is expected to be discussed at the meeting. . . . The White House said last week that it has provided more than $1.7 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since the invasion, including over 5,000 Javelins and more than 1,400 Stingers.

This permanent power faction is far from the only one to be reaping benefits from the war in Ukraine and to have its fortunes depend upon prolonging the war as long as possible. The union of the U.S. security state, Democratic Party neocons, and their media allies has not been riding this high since the glory days of 2002. One of MSNBC’s most vocal DNC boosters, Chris Hayes, gushed that the war in Ukraine has revitalized faith and trust in the CIA and intelligence community more than any event in recent memory — deservedly so, he said: “The last few weeks have been like the Iraq War in reverse for US intelligence.” One can barely read a mainstream newspaper or watch a corporate news outlet without seeing the nation’s most bloodthirsty warmongering band of neocons — David Frum, Bill Kristol, Liz Cheney, Wesley Clark, Anne Applebaum, Adam Kinzinger — being celebrated as wise experts and heroic warriors for freedom.

This war has been very good indeed for the permanent Washington political and media class. And although it was taboo for weeks to say so, it is now beyond clear that the only goal that the U.S. and its allies have when it comes to the war in Ukraine is to keep it dragging on for as long as possible. Not only are there no serious American diplomatic efforts to end the war, but the goal is to ensure that does not happen. They are now saying that explicitly, and it is not hard to understand why.

The benefits from endless quagmire in Ukraine are as immense as they are obvious. The military budget skyrockets. Punishment is imposed on the arch-nemesis of the Democratic Party — Russia and Putin — while they are bogged down in a war from which Ukrainians suffer most. The citizenry unites behind their leaders and is distracted

from their collective deprivations. The emotions provoked by the horrors of this war — unprecedentedly shown to the public by the Western media which typically ignores carnage and victims of wars waged by Western countries and their allies — is a very potent tool to maintain unity and demonize domestic adversaries. The pundit class finds strength, purpose and resolve, able to feign a Churchillian posture without any of the risks. Prior sins and crimes of American elites are absolved and forgotten at the altar of maximalist claims about Putin’s unprecedented evils — just as they were absolved and forgotten through the script which maintained that the U.S. had never encountered a threat as grave or malignant as Trump. After all, if Putin and Trump are Hitler or even worse, then anyone who opposes them is heroic and noble regardless of all their prior malignant acts.

And that is why even small pockets of dissent cannot be tolerated. It is vital that Americans and Europeans remain entrapped inside a completely closed system of propaganda about the war, just as Russians are kept entrapped inside their own. Keeping these populations united in support of fighting a proxy war against Russia is far too valuable on too many levels to permit any questioning or alternative perspectives. Preventing people from asking who this war benefits, and who is paying the price for it, is paramount.

Big Tech has long proven to be a reliable instrument of censorship and dissent-quashing for the U.S. Government (much to the chagrin of corporate media employees, Russian outlets still remain available on free speech alternatives such as Rumble and Telegram, which is why so much ire is now directed at them). A rapid series of ostensible “crises” — Russiagate, 1/6, the COVID pandemic — were all exploited to condition Westerners to believe that censorship was not only justified but necessary for their own good. In the West, censorship now provokes not anger but gratitude. All of that laid the perfect foundation for this new escalation of a censorship regime in which dissent, on a virtually daily basis, is increasingly more difficult to locate.

No matter one’s views on Russia, Ukraine, the U.S. and the war, it should be deeply alarming to watch such a concerted, united campaign on the part of the most powerful public and private entities to stomp out any and all dissent, while so aggressively demonizing what little manages to slip by. No matter how smart or critically minded or sophisticated we fancy ourselves to be, none of us is immune to official propaganda campaigns, studied and perfected over decades. Nor is any of us immune to the pressures of group-think and herd behavior and hive minds: these are embedded in our psyches and thus easily exploitable.

That is precisely the objective of restricting and closing the information system available to us. It makes it extremely difficult to remain skeptical or critical of the bombardment of approved messaging we receive every day from every direction in every form. And that is precisely the reason to oppose such censorship regimes. An opinion or belief adopted due to propaganda and reflex rather than autonomy and critical evaluation has no value.

67 comments

    1. Utter bullshit. Like so much that the libertarian loon orner published about Russia and Ukraine.

    2. Greenwald of course fails to bring up the fact that many of those in the west who are hungry for Russia’s perspective of this war largely come from the far right nationalist types such as Richard Spencer. Individuals who idolize Putin in the same way they idolize Trump. And who follow racist conspiracy logic like the white replacement theory.

      Yeah I’m sure Greenwald is never gonna mention this little tidbit.

  1. “(just as one is free to spread disinformation provided that its purpose is to strengthen the Democratic Party,”
    Oh, like the “3rd parties can’t win” meme?
    “Punishment is imposed on the arch-nemesis of the Democratic Party — Russia and Putin …”
    You forgot to mention the “Putin puppets” like Stein who was dragged before a Senate subcommittee for days –
    ” .. it should be deeply alarming to watch such a concerted, united campaign on the part of the most powerful public and private entities to stomp out any and all dissent, while so aggressively demonizing what little manages to slip by.”
    No kidding!
    “This war has united the establishment wings of both parties …”
    BOTH parties, Glenn, both parties …

    Are you aware that the Green Party and the Libertarian Party have mounted a suit in NYS regarding the egregious number of signatures required for 3rd parties to get on the ballot – so not only is the duopoly managing to wipe out dissenting voices in the press, but at the polls as well? Why doesn’t that seen to bother you?

    And why do you require “pay to play” on your site – “free speech” on your site isn’t “free”

    1. Glenn never said these issues do not bother him….You are making that up simply because he didn’t mention them in this article.

      1. To Maxine,
        He never mentions them – I have been reading his stuff for awhile – I even subscribed to his site so that I could comment – had to “pay to play” – but after awhile i could see where he was coming from, commented a number of times, never got a reply or response – did not renew my “subscription”

        He clearly strongly dislikes Ds – so do I but I feel the same way about Rs, and i don’t recall him ever critiquing them – he seems to have first gotten upset about censorship when the SM sites were dumping Trump – read enough of his stuff and you will see the “pattern”. Where was he when both the Green AND the Libertarian candidates were kept off the debate stage in the ’16 election …

        As I said in my post, BOTH mainstream parties feel the same – I think he has a definite Libertarian streak – so why not at least mention, preferably condemn, the suit mounted in NY against attempting to essentially “censoring” them from the ballot

      2. Thanks for the explanation….He was one of my heroes but I do see that Glenn has changed in some unexpected ways in recent years….Interestingly, I attended a talk he gave in 2012 at Carnegie Hall, largely about the Edward Snowden issue….At the end, he commented that it might be the last time he would be allowed to speak freely against the establishment in the US….I thought he might be exaggerating but, indeed, it’s turning out to be true.

    2. The Socialist Equality Party has had to go through this ridiculous and antidemocratic routine for decades. I personally have spent hours and days getting signatures on the street just to get the SEP on the ballot. The Republican/Democrat duopoly in the United States is completely undemocratic. Any voters who still believe the elections here are open and honest is incredibly naive. The two “official” political parties even eat their own young. Look at how Hillary Clinton and her cohorts sabotaged Bernie Sanders. Look at how Trump repeatedly fired his own staff members for not worshipping him enough.

      1. To Carolyn,
        I think of the D/Rs as 2 political mafia parties – warring over control of “their” territory – they have grudgingly agreed to split it up, and they both agree to keep out any challengers to their hegemony – they give the game away when they refer to those challengers as “spoilers” – they feed us the lie that “3rd parties can’t win” when its rather a truism that any candidate on a ballot can win if enough people vote for ’em – so, fearing that the rest of us might finally figure that out and decide to throw the D/R bums out – they make it more and more difficult to get ON the ballot – and if another party manages to do it anyway, they keep them out of the debates – the 2016 Pres debates are a good example, and they are putting their ability to access Fed.l matching funds out of reach.
        It seems to me that the Left, though, is rather shooting itself in the foot, or other parts of its anatomy, by failing to get together and mount a unified challenge ….

      2. @SH
        I’ve long said that Democrats and Republicans are far more like gangs than political parties. I saw this firsthand growing up in Chicago, where Republicans weren’t allowed on City Council. Not because Chicago was so liberal, but because the Democratic gang had taken over the city and wouldn’t let the Republican gang in.

        If the U.S. had proportional representation, a complete ban on private campaign contributions, and a requirement of equal TV time for all candidates, the Republicans and Democrats together probably wouldn’t be more than 20% of elected representatives in both state and federal governments.

      3. To Jeff,
        And if wishes were horses, then beggars would ride – in the meantime, we need to support and vote for 3rd parties while we still have the chance, because the D/Rs are doing the best they can to keep them out …

      4. @SH
        Why do you insist that these things are mutually exclusive? I’m registered Green and vote for every Green candidate, and I advocate that everyone do the same (though the Green Party sold out many years ago and I’d like to start a real peace & environmental party to replace it). But making the changes I advocated in my previous post is a higher priority, because we’ll never get enough non-Democrats and non-Republicans in office to accomplish anything without those changes. We agree that people shouldn’t vote Democrat or Republican, but major systemic changes are needed for other parties to have a fighting chance (aside from rare exceptions).

      5. To Jeff,
        So please tell me, how do you get those changes as long as D/Rs are in power? I ask this often and never get an answer other than “call, petition, demonstrate” – but folks have been doing that for decades, and, as Biden assured us, “nothing will fundamentally change” – until, that is, we actually kick the bums out …
        So Jeff, tell me, were you in Hempstead protesting the exclusion of the GP candidate from the ’16 Pres debates?

      6. @SH
        Fair question, but I’ll ask you the same: How do you get a meaningful number of alternative party candidates elected in this rigged system? One possible answer to your question would be ballot initiatives. Of course members of the two gangs are not going to vote for things like proportional representation, eliminating private campaign contributions that keep them in office and enrich them, and equal TV time for all candidates, but ballot initiatives can get around that problem. This is not a perfect solution by a long shot, it’s just one idea.

        This is a chicken-and-egg question and there is no right answer. Like I said, you do both, but our focus should always be on systemic fixes, not on individual symptoms of a bad system.

  2. A big win for EU too – rapidly aging west Europeans so loathe to accept African-Asians into their fold are ecstatically welcoming white Ukrainian refuges/immigrants – so very necessary to keep their social security systems afloat.

    1. As a woman of 73, I cannot support any comments that think people my age are not entitled to a pension or social security. Since I am not independently wealthy, I still have to work to supplement my meagre social security benefits in the United States. I should have been able to retire at 65. Fat chance.

      1. Yes, the demonization of SS and any and all pension systems is ongoing. I’m a unionized worker with a large public concern, and I have to put off retirement (I’m 65 now) until the housing bubble bursts. I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard somebody tell me how my pension is “obscene,” or my union pay is way too much. And don’t forget that Biden has been itching for 50 years to gut SS.

      2. @TimN
        The main reason that other people (not the rich or propagandists, but regular people) would complain about your pay or retirement is because they don’t have what you have. Everyone should receive a living wage, and everyone should be able to retire by age 60 and still be able to pay rent or mortgage, normal bills, and eat. People who don’t have that, which in the U.S. is most people, are rightfully and reasonably insecure, and they unconsciously think that if others also lack it that we’d at least all be in the same “boat,” which in turn would give them a (false) sense of security.

        I will say that in some of the large urban areas of the U.S., public employees are grossly overpaid and have outrageous and immoral retirements (some, like cops, get 100% of their income when they retire, which they can do in their 50s!). This money given to overpaid public employees is money taken away from needed things like schools and social programs. So certain public employees are now part of a relatively elite class that’s robbing from the public coffers in order to enrich itself. For employees of private (i.e., non-governmental) companies, they should get as much as they can, screw the piggy bosses and owners. In fact, all private companies should be worker-owned, except for natural monopolies like utilities, which should be owned by the government. Public employees who receive pay and benefits beyond what is normal are doing harm to the greater society, so this is an exception to my position on this issue.

  3. Glenn is spot on. It’s almost as if you are not allowed now to have two competing thoughts. You can dislike Trump, but at the same time good luck convincing anyone else that he isn’t a Russian Manchurian Candidate. You can disapprove of the war, but you’re a stooge if you also recognize US interference in Ukraine.

    1. Far too many people are unable to deal with complicated thoughts or situations. I blame the deterioration of the education system in the United States, which system stopped teaching critical thinking long ago. Life in the universe is complicated. It requires study. Most people are just bandwagon jumpers and that is dangerous for the rest of us.

  4. Again the US PROPAGANDA MACHINE will serve to destroy itself and others, in ways it does not even comprehend. All US attempts in the past to influence the power structures in foreign countries failed miserably, why? Because of the lies, clear misinformation and disinformation, and now the public knows about this tactic and refuses to accept what is said. Stupidity and Ignorance go hand in hand when it comes to censorship, and the perceived value of it in the hands of the coward morons who seek to control the narrative.

    1. @Edward William Case
      The problem is that they haven’t failed, miserably or otherwise. The Gulf of Tonkin lie pushed the U.S. into Vietnam. The weapons of mass destruction lie got Americans to back the invasion & occupation of Iraq. Etc.

  5. What I also find frightening about this clamp down on information, is that it has become even more difficult to find out what may really be going on. It is important to me to have multiple sources that I can trust are using independent information. Right now with sources so limited, I have to wonder how much the information I and finding is actually from independent sources.

    I am also finding fairly sophisticated friends that will not question this aggressive propaganda campaign and don’t seem able to consider that there is more going on than the garbage that they are hearing. They are calling any questioning, that you are subscribing to QAon. Are we now so vulnerable?

    In previous massive US propaganda campaigns (like the Iraq invasion), you could count on what I call “page-17 of the NYT.” The propaganda was on the front page but on the inside pages you could find the real reporting that actually contradicted the propaganda. You had to understand how this contradicted the propaganda, but there was reasonably accurate information readily available if you looked for it. This may not be the case this time. I think that some of the reporting in the NYT, and other mainstream press, may actually be intentional disinformation, not simply distortion.

    1. Thank you, Mike. I come to this site not only for the analysis of various writers beyond the MSM propaganda, but also for the reader comments – like the one you made. There are others here that I look forward to as well.

    2. I have known that most of the reporting in the NYT and WaPo is intentional disinformation for years. There are CIA agents who work in the newsrooms. This is not my opinion. It has been verified even by the CIA itself.

      1. All legal since Smith Mundt was abolished, er, “modernized” to allow State department (read: CIA) domestic propaganda.
        This is what Police States do. Control of the Official Narrative is necessary for their corruption to flourish.

      2. All legal since Smith Mundt was abolished, er, “modernized” to allow State department (read: CIA) domestic propaganda.
        This is what Police States do. Control of the Official Narrative is necessary for their corruption to flourish.

  6. Thank you Glenn for another informative article. It does seem to me that the US lie machine is cranked up to an even higher level that was the case when it was lying us into the Iraq war. Censorship is the flip side of that operation. We should also not lose sight of the fact that the serious assault on our first and fourth amendment freedoms began shortly after 9/11 using the “prevention of terrorism” being used as the pretext. The result was the creation of all the new “intelligence agencies” vested with tremendous power to invade our privacy, collect our information, without our knowledge or consent. Much of these powers, gleefully handed over by our almost-always clueless Congress, violated our constitutional rights. Not surprisingly, no one has been held to account for any of these violations. Heads of “intelligence agencies” have lied to Congress about these violations but not held to account.
    Truth tellers are persecuted with trumped up charges. This has become routine. The “constitutional lawyer” and fake progressive Obama set a record for the number of whistleblowers prosecuted. Trump took things a very large step further (few people seem even now to realize how big that step was) by indicting Julian Assange under false Espionage charges. Biden has foolishly chosen to continue that prosecution.
    It seems to me that the establishment has, if not invented, certainly greatly overstated the “problem” of social media misinformation and harassment. Our existing laws on libel and slander should be adequate to address any claims of harm which arise from abusive posts. To do so might require additional protocols for identification. I am not knowledgeable about the technical aspects of it. However, it is clear, as the article points out, that it is the interest of the establishment to have the right to use censorship for the purpose of shaping the narratives to suit its purposes and policies. At the heart of the problem is the fact that “our” government does not serve us. It serves the elites in an undemocratic, autocratic form of government. Call it Fascism, Oligarchy, or whatever term we wish to use. But it does not serve our interests. Hence the need to lie to us. And lie to us it does. It has now lied us into yet another war of aggression. As usual, most people are not even aware that this has happened, even though many of them have lived through it many times before. The US propaganda machine works very well.

    1. Thanks for the link.
      The Ukraine-Government based propaganda is understandable, they are at War. Similarly Russia’s crackdown on their media is understandable, they are at War too.
      Technically the US is NOT at war, so there is no justification for censorship and most Americans no doubt would prefer honest coverage of the War, warts and all. Of course support for Ukraine might drop dramatically if people were allowed opposing views, and THIS Establishment cannot allow that. They need new War revenue streams (they never track where all that money goes with good reason) to replace Afghanistan (stealing THEIR money in our banks was a pittance to our neocon Elites).
      In Africa, gun smuggling by War Lords has often been punished as war crimes. The US, as with their never ending military campaigns and coups (Egypt, Honduras and Ukraine, and now Pakistan) follow the Thucydides quote: ““Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

  7. The urgency behind all this censorship is simple: fascism brooks no dissent .

    Plus the superstructure of US Empire Eu Nato hegemony and the political and economic base structure at home are so fragile. They know that the tiniest bit of skepticism or dissent can cause it all to crash down.

    It will crash down anyway, despite the WEF Nato US Empire best efforts at censorship.

    Let’s give it all a push.

  8. The internet is now a cesspool of information and sifting through the stuff is rather boring but I have found more factual info on Ukraine on several Greek websites. There seems to be a thick wall up against stating historical facts and facts that relate to resources in Ukraine on American sites. It becomes much more clear that Putin wants Ukraine but not Ukrainians.

  9. Propaganda around Russian intervention is not only targeting people’s access to diverse sources of world news so monolithic anti Russian even Russophobic narrative reminds unchallenged but even US internal developments regarding war are lied about. The truth is nobody in the west really helps Ukraine to defeat Russians or end this war. In fact they make Ukraine suffer more.

    Example is meeting of US MIC with Biden presented as discussion of how to help Ukraine with presumably US heavy military hardware. In fact that is a lie. Firstly, pentagon already announced that they are working on buying of old mostly decommissioned by now Soviet equipment all over the world as AFU has appropriate training to operate and hence meeting has nothing to do with US or NATO MIC development and production of appropriate adequate for Ukrainian war weapon systems. They talking more profits and more arms for NATO.

    Secondly, NATO commanders already ordered not to send to Ukraine any latest western active duty and reservist heavy NATO military hardware as it would weaken NATO defenses in European theatre in time of new enhanced threats. They only allow old outdated small arms defensive weapons of variety of kinds with not capabilities to shift strategic balance of Ukrainian war.

    Example of that limit is a case of German response for Zelensky pleas for German tanks and APCs namely offering rusting in parking lots owned by German Armament manufacturers 30-50 1970s and 1980s versions of Leopard I tanks mostly dilapidated all decommissioned decades ago many used for target practice instead of something than may defeat Russian infantry armament. Zelensky was furious and in his clownish ways canceled Schultz visit in Kiev until Germany send them real “Russian killing stuff”.

    But they won’t because Pentagon said no. So DOD said not to Ukrainian propaganda about Russian atrocities that is designed to escalate conflict NATO is utterly unprepared and outgunned to face at this time. In other words Ukraine is being flooded by useless junk getting into astronomical debt it will never repay. That is perhaps why Russians do almost nothing while west is smuggling partially dismantled tanks one at the time in civilians cargo trucks and railroad cars only to store them in underground shelters never to be used by AFU as they have no diesel fuel and no ammunition.

    And if they emerged near current frontlines they would be killed by for example loitering ammunition deployed by long range guns or drones. Ukraine lost so far 2100 tanks and APCs out of 2300 they had two months ago while nominally gained about 150+ from smuggling.

    It is hopeless, serves solely propaganda of western support for Ukraine which according to Pentagon official who authored report in March and seconded by Scott Ritter analysis lost this war as they loss any strategic offensive capabilities and deliberately chose terrorist tactic to commit war crimes of outright militarization of most not evacuated cities using their own citizen as human shields, violating Geneva conventions as deliberacje defense strategy.

    This cruel criminal military strategy borrowed from Waffen SS in the only factor that prolongs pain and suffering of Ukrainian civilians and hastens demise of AFU and its conscript soldiers Russian kid glove tactics aimed to spare.

    It is Ukrainian Nazi battalions that recognizing their criminality want to sacrifice last Ukrainian on altar of their murderous ideology. But such sober assessments of danger of UkroNazis to European peace published numerous times in US MSM including NYT years ago we won’t find today, censored as Greenwald aptly described in his article.

  10. It’s a revolving door of all the same crap. THis is not new, not ground-breaking, and, alas, the entire WWW and Internet, all of it, was primed for this sort of censorship. Imagine, all the book bans, all the librarians who have no budgets, and all those books that get screened out. So, we have the WWW? That’s the great evolution of information and discourse. Glenn knows this, that the internet has always been a scam, so, he is just jostling with the same crap that many of us predicted at the birth of that CIA-NSA,DARPA effing thing, the Net.

    So, all emails are now hacked or read or both by the masters of spookland, with the backdoor built in by these billionaire sociopaths. All phone calls no knock warrantless spying.

    Both BIG R and BIG D are in the same camp. Who cares what Glenn thinks politically? He is, in the end, part of the presstitute, just a little bit different than the big boys and girls on the big networks.

  11. It’s infuriating to see the gross hysterical extreme overreaction to Russia’s invasion by the entire west, and to see people in the U.S. act like Pavlov’s dogs in thinking, feeling, and acting exactly as they are told to by the government and its propaganda media. Even former anti-war protesters are now flying Ukrainian flags and donating money to Ukraine, while calling out anyone who doesn’t denigrate Russia and Putin or who tries to provide some context and history for the invasion. Even punk rockers, some of the most rebellious people around, are doing this (though they’re older now, so that might be part of their problem).

    All of this is due to extreme and very sophisticated propaganda, with no alternative viewpoints allowed. As Glenn said, if you want anything but what the U.S. wants to you know, you have to make a pretty big effort to find it. This situation is a perfect example of both how free speech can be grossly abused by publishing lies & propaganda, and how restricting speech can lead to average people turning into monsters.

    1. I should add that we need to criminalize defamation for speech that causes major harm, such as the weapons of mass destruction lies, the denial of global warming/climate change lies, and now the lies about the war in Ukraine trying to convince people that Russia’s attack was unprovoked. No censorship, let people say what they want. But if you get caught publishing a lie that causes serious harm, you face serious prison time. Suing people for defamation for personal harms doesn’t cut it here.

      1. @Jeff – you write, “It’s infuriating to see the gross hysterical extreme overreaction to Russia’s invasion by the entire west, and to see people in the U.S. act like Pavlov’s dogs in thinking, feeling, and acting exactly as they are told to by the government and its propaganda media.”

        Your comments are disgusting and provide insights into your beliefs. Unfortunately, there are some, like Greenwald, who seek to capitalize on those, like you, who salivate when the right stimulus is provided.

      2. @CityKid
        I love it when people like you who have no legitimate arguments resort to childish name-calling. How cute! And of course my comments provide insights into my beliefs, so do everyone else’s. Duh!

      3. Jeff, sick of hearing that it was provoked. Nothing justifies this war, but you keep on with your tunnel vision of it.

        However, I totally agree with Greenwald’s assessment. It seems we are jumping from the Middle East into a war by proxy. The MIC has been in control for 70 years and I’m not sure how we can stop it.

        It’s sick. It’s two bullies going at it against each other. So please stop defending Russia with the provocation excuse.

      4. @Tom
        1. The fact that the U.S. provoked Russia into invading doesn’t justify the invasion. I have always said that I oppose the invasion because I’m anti-war, and in order to be a legitimate position, being anti-war doesn’t allow for exceptions. Opposing the invasion and recognizing that the U.S. provoked it are two different things, sorry if you can’t hold both in your mind at the same time. Holding these two positions does not mean that I have tunnel vision, it means that I can think critically, I’m not swayed by U.S. propaganda, and that my thinking can be nuanced as much as required.

        2. I have never defended Russia, at least not in the sense that you mean. I hate all large countries, including Russia and the U.S. (I will say that if I weren’t anti-war I’d be firmly on Russia’s side in this war, because aside from the invasion, it has a far more legitimate position than the west in this situation, including continuing NATO’s existence, NATO’s refusal to admit Russia, NATO’s eastward expansion despite promises not to do so, the 2014 U.S. fomented coup in Ukraine, and the Ukrainian attacks against ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine. Russia has totally legitimate grievances here, and the only one the west has is that Russia invaded.) All large countries like Russia and the U.S. should be broken into much smaller ones, because the less power they have the better for the Earth and all the life on it, including most humans.

  12. This Glenn Greenwald’s piece though generally on point fails to approach central historical causation of this Russian/NATO war.

    Greenwald, in keeping with the hallowed traditions of White liberalism, does not account for decades of Russian encirclement, decades of sanctions against Russia, centuries where the West has sought to colonize Russia for its resources, the strategic patience of the Russian Federation over decades in the misguided hope that the West will see the ignorance of its ways, the failure of the Atlanticist to respond to Russia’s legitimate demands. And on and on.

    As Greenwald attemps to walk through the raindrops of a false constructionism acceptable in the West amongst a coterie of liberal commentators whose underlying theses are that there is never to be a just war, that America is never to be confronted by an equal and as brutal a military might which it freely imposes on works countries and that there must always be an irrational centricism even when the preponderance of evidence indicates a firm determination.

    Those determinations are that the Russian Federation is winning this war inspite of the self indulgent media propaganda campaigns of the West. That it is about time the Americans and the Europeans reaped what they have sown over centuries. That this game-playing of bannings are having no affect on geopolitical-geo-strategic outcomes. That if we must risk nuclear annihilation to de-centre Whiteness, as a political construction, those risks are now becoming more acceptable than an eternal White exceptionalism. That a regime of “unenlightenment” liberalism has failed to constrain the barbarity of White people, and never will.

  13. For the crime of posting an article about the neonazi groups in Ukraine (Lev Golinkin 2/22/22) I received this response from a person I had respected (until then) “:We’re done Nancy. I know lots of Ukrainians, and a lot more Russians, and it seems to me that YOU are possibly the only neo-Nazi I’ve ever met. Blame the victims for an unprovoked invasion of their country !! Good job Nance. Have a great rest of your life, having been the only person I know who believes that a country that elected a Jew to be their president is somehow a Nazi threat, a Nazi threat so bad that you have never once breathed even an insinuation that the Ukrainians are justified in defending their country. Don’t speak to me anymore. Go kill some children in Ukraine. And don’t claim I’m not listening to you, BULLSHIT, I read every single one of these non-sensical-any-fucking-moron-on -the-planet-can-see-that-it’s-pure-shit-propaganda-produced-in-the-suburbs-of-st-petersburg articles, looking for a nanogram of truth in them, but found none. You have seriously wasted one of the things I most value in my life, time. I can see you now, in October 1939, writing on Facebook to all who would listen, “Don’t just blame the Nazis for the killing in Poland, there’s a lot of Jews there, and think of how much they must hate Nazi Germany, so maybe Poland would have invaded Germany, ya never know”. That’s exactly what you sound like spreading these idiotic articles. A blithering fanatic. Like I said Nancy, we’re done.

    1. @Nancy Sharp
      Anyone who says anything like that is so biased and/or brainwashed that they can’t think straight. I’ve been called things like a Putin apologist just for pointing out that Russia’s invasion was totally provoked, even though I’ve also said that I oppose the invasion because no one should be invading anyone else. This is what we have to deal with now, a totally brainwashed and biased citizenry who can’t think straight, critically, or rationally. I’ve often kept my mouth shut on this issue (not always) in order to avoid losing friends or being ostracized, but it’s tough.

      1. @jeff

        Never thought I’d ever say it, ol’ jeff, but for once we are in agreement!

        Putin was certainly provoked!

        I mean, how dare the Ukrainians insist on their right to chose their own economic and military affiliation, or hold their elected officials accountable to their promises during presidential campaigns, or on their right to protest without being bitten or shot at, or on their right to resolve their own ethnic tensions without the militarized interventions from any of its former oppressors, or on their right to preserve their territorial integrity!

        After all, what are few thousands dead people, tens of millions of refugees, a devastation of a country and the risking of WW III, when compared to the trampled fragile pride of “the greatest living leader in the world today”**?

        ** this is a verbatim quote from a TV show Putin appeared on at one of his (stolen) state TV station.

  14. //On a virtually daily basis, any off-key news agency, independent platform or individual citizen is liable to be banished from the internet.//

    This opening salvo projects such a wild misunderstanding of the nature of the internet that nothing else in the article need be considered due to the recklessness of Greenwald’s opinion

    The simple point is that centrally owned and managed social media companies are not the internet. These are private communications monopolies which present the appearance of public spaces, and have to follow some rules that support this appearance, but are no more than clubs. Like the “Journalist Club” of very well paid spectators to Democracy of which GG enjoys membership, but may and can be kicked out at any time.

    Any one in western world can get on the internet and reach an enormous audience and be effectively unbannable for about 10$ / month and some hard white-collar work.

    What anyone cannot easily do at this price-point is be an agent of considerable political power by running hearsay fan networks for whatever cause-du-jour.

    To be a creature of social media requires access to the big social media concerns.

    But what does this have to do with democracy except the Manufacture of Consent, at whatever level of consent you feel is politically optimal for your agenda, where today, the most common objective is getting paid.

    It’s that simple. And GG’s M.O. is this simple. Democracy, to him, long ago became merely an utterance. But everybody’s doin’ it, so whatever.

    1. @AReply
      That’s utter BS. Social media platforms are now the public square, and these companies need to be highly regulated as utilities in order to prevent censorship. (Your phone company can’t cancel your account or censor you because you say certain, things, for example.) Without that regulation, it’s clear to anyone with a brain and who’s honest that the only information that will be widely available will be what the government and its corporate masters want people to have. Sure, anyone can get on Rumble etc., but they won’t reach a fraction of the people that they would on YouTube.

  15. @Jeff – my comments are not name calling. I quoted you because what you wrote demonstrates that you are rationalizing at least some of the killing in Ukraine; something you have done repeatedly in comments here. It’s as simple as that, it’s not name calling. You, like many others who seek to justify the behaviors of various parties, even when they are responsible for lots of dead innocent people, are not worth the time and effort you seek. I see little to no reason to engage with you in any sort of a discussion. Have at it Jeff, I know you always like to have the “last word.”

    1. @CityKid
      Personal attack, name-calling, whatever. You didn’t address any points I made, and instead attacked me personally. Do you have any legitimate responses to any of my points? If not, I’m happy to disengage with you, because your childish and irrelevant responses are not a discussion of issues in any meaningful way.

      1. I know I am late to this discussion, and maybe I sound naive, but I follow Glenn Greenwald, as well as many other online journalists who have had the good sense to detach from mainstream corporate media because they want to communicate the truth as best they can, so I just read this cogent piece about the repression of dissenting voices which is like a breath of fresh air to me after arguing with my friends and family members who have turned into Ukraine-flag-waving zombies, and I don’t understand why there are all these people commenting on this site who hate Glenn. Why don’t they go somewhere else? Okay, so they think Putin is as bad as Hitler, that he would have invaded Ukraine regardless of NATO’s actions, he wants to recreate the Soviet Union, blah blah blah all bullshit nonsense — he was provoked by NATO’s actions, anyone with half a brain knows it, it doesn’t mean we excuse his actions, we are not Putin “apologists” we are only seeing the whole picture, so why don’t these people just go away from here and find some stupid people to follow instead of trashing Glenn?

    2. @citykid
      i have met Jeff with facts, and he no longer engages with me… here is one: ukraine wants to join the EU, [and why wouldn’t they? it is distinctly more fun than the Russian federation…] so this ‘provokes’ russia and now, if they attack, Jeff sees this as ‘self defense’ – the absolutely fascinating disconnect is that Jeff has spoken of the right for self-determination the russian separatists in donbas should have, but he sees zero contradiction with denying Ukraine the same right… they want to join EU, putin no like, so Ukraine is ‘provoking’ putin and hence are responsible for the ensuing war [sorry, Jeff, ‘special military operation for ye]…
      anybody ever ask why putin’s neighbors, like the baltics, started BEGGING to be in the NATO in 1992 and, 12 years [!] later became members…
      a] not a very aggressive expansion, some countries it took 20 years to join, but more importantly
      b] why is it that apart from europe’s last dictatorship in Belarus, NO OTHER NEIGHBOR WANTS TO BE IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION, why would all those countries [which, mind you, know Russia much better than us from the decades of being OCCUPIED by russia, why would they all be so AFRAID of russia? even Finland feels that neutrality is no longer an option…. Jeff, why can’t they see the noble russians ye see?
      anyway, someone please explain why the right of self-determination does not apply to Ukraine? Jeff?
      oh, and Jeff, fellow green party member here and longer than ye, had me skull moderately bashed fighting the’ U,S. military expansion of a european airport a few decades ago…
      so tell me, Jeff, on the sub-surface mission of the ‘Moskva’ do ye go with the ukrainian propaganda that it was a missile strike, or with the russian propaganda that it was just incompetence? tpough chice, que no?

  16. Putting aside responding to the chutzpah in talking about western ‘censorship’ while Putin jails Russians for expressing criticism of the war, not to mention the closure all remaining media publications, expelling western media organizations, or legislating against dissent and protests, the fact that consortiumnews, scheerpost, sputniknews, rt, tomdispatch, and other ‘western’ left-ish Neo progressive propaganda channels are all available online makes the statement “[extreme] censorship campaign” entirely false. Further, the deprivation of publication platform from Russian Propaganda outlets like RT or Sputnik is not censorship at all since it does not try to suppress or prohibit the publication of their lies but to prevent the abuse of the popularity of certain services by Kremlin’s propagation of falsehoods.

    The innocuous designation “Western Criticism of NATO’s Ukraine Policy” of the weaponized, highly restricted at all times and more often than not false information used by the so call ‘western critics’ does not simply misrepresent the type of texts Greenwald speaks of but is itself a parroting of the falsehoods emanating from the Kremlin itself. In other words, it is neither ‘western’ since it is generated by Russia, nor ‘criticism’ since it misinforms, misrepresents or outright fabricates rather than points at flaws, and it has nothing to do with ‘NATO policy’ since there is no such policy.

    “NATO’s Ukraine Policy” doesn’t exist, and never did. The expansion of NATO into former soviet states came, and continues to do so, at the request – urgent, acute and even desperate at times – of former victims of the Russian imperialist and expansionist impulse that goes back hundreds of years in some cases, which past experiences with Russian oppression and (since the collapse of Soviet Russia) newly found independence, democratic for the most part, moves them to distance themselves as much as they can from Russia, toward tightening economic ties with the EU, as well as to seek the defense of the European military deterring strength.

    As a matter of fact, the characterization of the current crisis ‘US proxy war caused by NATO expansion’ is perhaps the biggest left-ish and Russian fabrication of all.

    Acknowledging that the Ukrainian will to gain the military protection of NATO contributed to Putin’s anxiety and the severity of his extreme response, what triggered his annexation of Crimea, the clandestine invasion and precipitation of militarized conflict in Donbas and Luhansk back in 2014, as well as the current imperialist, full scale invasion were the events that led to the Russian patsy Yanukovych fleeing Ukraine as a result of an organic wave of protests decrying Yanukovych’s failure to fulfill his central election campaign promise to move the country towards closer economic ties with and integration into the EU. It had absolutely nothing to do with the Ukrainian ambition to join NATO. Further, the US involvement, which was at the request of pro-EU politicians and non-governmental organizations, was in an advisory capacity only.

    In short, there was no coup in 2014, the events, which had little to do with NATO, were a result of the Russian directive (to Yanukovych) to undermine the popular and persistent Ukrainian will to partake in the economic success of the EU, and the US only involvement was in an advisory and observer capacity.

    Consider this: despite the fact that Zelensky repeatedly declared that Ukraine will not join NATO, that Donbas and Luhansk would receive greater autonomy and independence and that the fate of Crimea would be left to negotiation at a later date Putin’s imperialist war of conquest continues. What Putin seem to want is the subjugated Ukraine, defeated if possible, and he is not likely to accept anything less. Consider, as well, that despite repeated requests from Ukraine, as well as crass Russian attempt to escalate the conflict (eg, the threats to use nuclear and chemical weapons), NATO and the US, under Biden and the Democrats, had consistently maintained a commitment to defensive measures only.

    To sum, there is no (western) censorship, there is no (left-ish) criticism, and the parroting of Russian propaganda by westerners does not make it ‘western’. There is no NATO expansion policy, and the current Putin tantrum has more to do with the Ukrainian will to be part of the EU and shun its past oppressors than with its will to be protected from precisely the kind of violence Putin has been unleashing on it since 2014.

    1. wow, finally some other spirit who has done their homework…
      Orks like Jeff always speak of the ‘aggressive expansion’ as if NATO came in with gun-to-the-head threat of invasion [that’s really more putin’s thing] or even bribed them, aggressively courted them etc. the opposite is true. let’s look at facts.
      the baltic countries started BEGGING to be let in to NATO in the very early 1990’s, and became members some 14 [!] years later…. montenegro aggressively pursued NATO-membership for 14 years, too… it took North Macedonia TWENTY-FIVE years to become a member… so the only aggressive pursuit i see is the one of former russian-occupied colonies to make sure they have friends who will defend them and their deserved independence. and even Jeff might admit that the recent ILLEGAL war [sorry, jeff – ‘special military operation to ye] has only shown how right they were to fear Russia! look at sweden, finland – proudly non-aligned 6 months ago, now thinking hard on the NATO thing….
      anyway, i enjoyed yer common sense and well-researched post. thanks

    2. Why are you even on this site? The United States has been heavily involved in destructive regime change campaigns in Ukraine and dozens of other countries since WWII. This country trained right-wing militias to overrun peaceful protesters and engineer the coup in 2014 that resulted in the departure of the pro-Russian president. Why are you here reading Glenn Greenwald of all people? I don’t understand you and that city kid and all these other weirdos over here. I don’t go trolling around on sites of people with whom I violently disagree. What’s the point? I see this all the time and I don’t understand it. It’s one thing to engage in a constructive debate with other commenters and another to go on an “enemy” site and insult people and act like the seven-letter-word that starts with an “a.”

  17. Sorry but what you wrote are simple conjectures devoid facts, fabrications of western anti Russian narratives. I address just few points of such narrative you mentioned.

    1.resentment against Russians:

    real but explains nothing: After illegal dissolution of USSR vast majority of Ukrainian SSR people wanted to stay with Russia in Union. Only followed economic collapse of Russia and western sponsored propaganda promising economic help swayed reluctant ethnic Russia people to moderately n the east and overwhelmingly in western Ukraine to vote independence. Ukraine is a divided country.

    In 2014 most of Eastern Ukraine local governments, including Kharkiv, Lugansk, Donetsk, Mariupol etc., were run by Members of Yanukovitch Party of Regions supported by ethnic Russians of Ukrainian citizenship who rejected new Kiev regime as illegal and declared impeachment vote invalid due to intimidation and lack of impeachment quorum in parliament dominated by Yanukovitch Party. There was and even now there is no resentment of Russian Federation among 22 millions of ethic Russians living in Ukraine.

    2. Will of Ukrainians to joint EU should be respected:

    who are those Ukrainians. Vast majority of Ukrainians in fact rejected joining EU on imposed by EU conditions namely demand to cut off industrial ties with Russian Federation which would have resulted in up to ten millions unemployed as eastern Ukraine as industry would have been shut down. That is why, Yanukovitch who had support in Eastern Ukraine, refused that particular unfair deal while was supportive of slow economic transition into EU. The Pro EU Maidan protests were supported mostly by western Ukrainians and EU funded NGOs amid sufferings amid discontent of economic depression and ended in December 2013 by Yanukovitch proposing new elections focused on that subject later agreed with Germany and Poland to be healed in September 2014. Crowd of genuine protesters went home. But western Ukrainians from Eastern Galicia, Volhynia and Trans Carpatia would not have EU membership subject to electoral campaign and referendum they would have lost because of electoral demographics. So they continued to violently protest in January and February 2014 on payroll from US embassy in Kiev to the frustration of Nuland getting nowhere. And they did not overthrow the government. Call it what you want but Yanukovitch did not abandon presidency but his own presidential guard military unit organized mutiny refused their constitutional duty to protect president who was left with two body guards and left Kiev to provide safety for his family in eastern Ukraine while SBU illegally ordered arrest of president of Ukraine. It was classical coup forcing president out of office by unconstitutional means.

    3. What is wrong with Ukraine joining NATO alliance:

    The same what was wrong with Cuba joining military alliance with Russia in 1961 to deploy Russian missiles namely complete undermining foundation of US national security and defense strategy due to proximity of military deployment . And that threat instead of negotiations peace with with Cuba was hysterically countered by US bringing world to the brink of Nuclear war. Russia acted in Ukraine and particularly in Crimea like US would and did in Cuba defended vital national security interests.

    4. Russia invaded Donbas in 2014, instigated separatism:

    it is complete fabrication. No Russian invasion in Donbas at all. It is opposite Russia was against Ukrainian separatism in Donbas 2014 refused recognition of LDPR as independent states and rejected results of referendum of independence held in Donbas on May 11, 2014. In total RF twice rejected LDPR request of recognition as independent states and to join RF while in the same time within a month Russia recognized new Kiev Regime as legitimate, all that while UkroNazis were burning Russian embassy in Kiev. Russia never stopped supplying nat gas to Ukraine in 2014 despite the fact that Kiev regime outright declared it wouldn’t pay for it at all. And they did not, defaulting on Eurobonds they issued. Russian solution was autonomy for Donbas which was embedded in Minsk agreements ignored dragged for seven years only to be rejected by Zelensky in early 2021 when he signed government decree ordering return Crimea and Donbas under Ukraine control by whatever means available peacefully or not. Later he backed out of such war rhetoric under orders from his masters in Washington. First official RF aid for Donbas was humanitarian convoy in October 2014 delivered via Ukrainian customs crossings causing ten day delay (despite militia totally controlling another RF border checkpoint ) after hostilities significantly diminished and Donbas militia was ordered by Putin to retreat from outskirts of Mariupol 20+ miles East as Putin promised to help negotiate peace agreement . Except for about 1000 of Russian volunteers including 200 Chechens volunteers there was no Russian military in Donbas in 2014 , all the militias mostly outdated Afghanistan war era soviet weapons were acquired after AFU evacuated military bases in Donbas in spring and summer 2014.

    5. “ Zelensky repeatedly declared that Ukraine will not join NATO, that Donbas and Luhansk would receive greater autonomy and independence..”

    that is not true. He said that NATO does not want Ukraine, Ukrainian people do , and he can accept that for now and in such a case Ukraine will remain Neutral. That is in fact incorrect as already in 2004 Kiev was put by NATO on the fast track to join alliance despite Ukrainian opposition at that time. It was NATO push for expansion that never ceased and will continue making Zelensky promises empty. Moreover, Minsk agreements were all about autonomy (never independence) and reintegration of Donbas into Ukraine and they were sabotaged (demanding that LDPR authorities were tried as terrorists ) and finally rejected by Zelensky himself in 2021 in fact against his own electoral promises of peace in Donbas. It is Zelensky who broke trust of his people and LDPR authorities after years of political deceit. Now independence is the only option on the table and that too as in case of Crimea Zelensky wants unresolved for a decade. These are non starters for Russians while Zelensky is bluffing not negotiating as his masters want war.

    But all of that just showing your ignorance of facts which is excusable as you are definitely exposed to MSM manipulation hiding or fabricating facts on the ground. However your attitude to censorship is inexcusable namely seemingly justifying western total attack on independent journalism as well as Russian media in the west by censorship in Russia which in fact followed not led US decades old policies of gradual striping people’s of free speech rights. Both must be condemned.

    1. To Kalen,
      Thank you for that ….
      I used to watch RT on TV when it was available – there were some pretty good shows on and there was coverage on what was going on in eastern Ukraine over the last 8 years – with images coming out very like those plastered all over Western media of the devastation of Kiev, et.al. – only in eastern Ukraine the devastation was being perpetrated by the Gov’t on its own citizens in the east, and reports of refugees in the region fleeing EAST into Russia. Those images were never covered by western media – they didn’t suit the anti-Russia narrative.
      I can understand why RT has been banned in so many places – not because it is ALL “Russian propaganda”, but because some of it ISN’T and Western “interests” of various stripes don’t want us to see any glimpses of truth.

    2. @Kalen
      Good facts to counter this ridiculous crap. Unfortunately, you’re arguing with trolls. They see their job here as disrupting a progressive website by making these right wing comments and always pushing U.S. propaganda, and they don’t care about facts unless those facts support their propaganda.

  18. @Kalen

    I am familiar with Russian propaganda and left-ish Neo Progressive talking points, so your parroting of it here is superfluous, especially in the context of Scheerpost and Greenwald, two of the most consistent and brazen ‘alternative facts’ hubs.

    Let me repeat the most obvious counter factual your text, and regrettably almost all similar left-ish Neo Progressive quips: if your delusions concerning the “attack on independent journalism” were real or true, you and I would not and could not be having this debate here.

  19. I am sure you are correct about some level of censorship. However I will add a couple of caveats.

    1. I have read several accounts of US actions against Russia’s interests and I have not had to search very hard to find them. So maybe the censorship isn’t working that well.

    2. Our media is full of disinformation. It is a very bad problem and no one has found a solution for it yet.

    And, finally,

    3. The real problem which we have no solution for is the unjustified killing and destruction of Ukraine by Russia. Maybe instead of worrying about censorship you should be searching for a way to drop a bomb on Putin’s head.

  20. @Karen, you are typical Anglo American supremacist.

    We went absolutely bonkers when Russia put missiles in Cuba 1962,which in those old days would be about 1 hour to N Y. Now adays we believe Russia is totally bonkers for not allowing Nato, and US to place our missiles in Poland, East Europe and hopefully Ukraine, Georgia, Finland which is mere minutes from Moscow.

    Of course we have privilege, power and rights to do what ever we want because we have an unbeatable media that creatively makes many excuses for any, all wars.

    While we at it why not drop all pretenses and all- out sanction China so they also start shooting. In no time our defense budget will be 2 trillion and my job in M I complex will be a solid gold Rice bowl and my kids, grandkids future jobs in weapons production will be bright. But the rest of the world will be bombed, shot up and destroyed but why not? we shoot our selves all the time anyways.

    No one can defeat our financial weapons and complicit
    media, for all practical purposes Russia is already beaten and China has as a result also has been diminished.

  21. Glenn should move to Russia and try his “crusading reporter” schtick there if he wants to experience real censorship. Pro-Putin types like GG are scrambling to explain what is “really going on here” in spite of all the evidence that Putin is clearly a fascist autocrat and war criminal.

    1. Why should he move to Russia?….Can’t you understand that he’s AGAINST censorship wherever it lies….Particularly against it in a hypocritical country (namely the US) that claims to have a free press.

      You must be getting your info from a Fake News site….Glenn NEVER expressed a love for Putin.

    2. @Vic Sage
      What the U.S. is doing IS real censorship. Just because another country does it and possibly does it worse doesn’t make the U.S. doing it OK. Take your love-it-or-leave-it BS and go home.

      1. How many times do I have to hear, Take it Or Leave it? I know many First Nations friends who say the same about the illegal aliens — Brits, Danes, Krauts, et al — who came here without papers, passport s, or invitations.

        So, now, Vic Sage can’t take the fact the world turns, and golly, which one was that “good war?” WWI? WWII? Russia losing tens of millions defeating the Nazi’s? That war? Then, old USA, brings those Nazi’s on over. Missles, CIA, etc. What an A-Team.

        I have had “love it or leave it” thrown at me as a military brat, as a short-term military vet, as a teacher, journalist, social workers, writer, educator at college, in prisons, etc. Now as well, writing, social working, etc.

        Oh well, there are many many rocks to crawl under if ya can’t take it. You saying “love it or leave it” to the Ukraines? They getting a green light into USA, while Mexicans with family here, with hard grit under their nails working here, with all the connections to USA-Tortilla Curstain, they get cancelled, while the blue eyed ones, the Euro Trash, come marching into USA.

        Leave it, and love it/Turtle Island, from afar, UkiNazi’s.

        https://dissidentvoice.org/2022/04/the-impunity-of-war-lords-financial-thieves-israel-mercenaries-mindlessness/

      2. Totally agree….What’s more, with the extradition to the US and continued torture of Julian Assange, honest journalism will cease too exist….The powers that be will no longer use censorship as any real journalist will be afraid to tell the truth….America is worse than Russia as it claims to have a free press.

      3. Oh, that love it or leave it, but then, even loving it (USA) means you get your property stolen and your butt interned: The sharpest pencils in the bunch, USA leaders, business roundtable, politicos, SCOTUS, et al.

        https://dissidentvoice.org/2022/04/would-the-u-s-and-canada-put-people-in-camps/

        While 110,000 Japanese-Americans suffered in prison camps, the U.S. media whipped up a post-Pearl Harbor frenzy of fear on the West Coast. If one was to believe the news reports of the day, it would seem that it was always just a matter of hours until Japanese Zeros would be spotted over Hollywood — or anywhere on the Left Coast.

        In January 1942, Edward R. Murrow stirred up fifth column worries by telling an audience in Seattle that if their city was ever bombed, they would “be able to look up and see some University of Washington sweaters on the boys doing the bombing.”

        Despite widespread concerns of Japanese infiltration, an FBI report at the time admitted: “We have not found a single machine gun, nor have we found any gun in any circumstances indicating that it was to be used in a manner helpful to our enemies. We have not found a single camera which we have reason to believe was for use in espionage.”

        Although there was never a proven case of any type of sabotage by Japanese-Americans on the West Coast, this did little to ease the minds of men like California attorney general Earl Warren (later the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court). “I believe that we are just being lulled into a false sense of security,” Warren declared, “and that the only reason we haven’t had a disaster in California is because it has been timed for a different date.”

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: